I don't want to start a fight, but this is straight from the horse's mouth.
- Thread starter Deer Hunter
- Start date
- Status
chopinbloc
Member
well said, onmilo.
bowfin,
the 6.8 has been abandoned. i have not seen ANYONE, sf included, who was issued 6.8mm ammunition in afghanistan. i have seen 5.56mm lr (i forget the nomenclature) and i've seen a barret as well as some kind of funky looking mk19 variant with a huge optic assembly on it. i've seen designated marksmen and sniper rifles. i've seen m21s and m14s. i've seen a few 1911s including a remington rand that looked brand spanking new. i have never seen 6.8mm ammunition. there are probably more civilians with 6.8mm ar15s than soldiers with m4s or m16s in that caliber.
i suspect that some of the problem is that people expect their enemy to drop like a rock when hit, just like they do in the movies but that doesn't normally happen. not even with .30 caliber weapons. add to that the amazing quantity of rumor floating around the army about weapon related issues and you get what we're looking at. there are alot of soldiers that still think the 5.56mm tumbles on its way to the target, despite the fact that they can see perfectly round holes in the target when they zero. are you going to believe them? or what about the guys who are convinced that the bullet does crazy loops and "bounces" around inside the target? do you believe them? just because a soldier says something doesn't make it true. and that goes double for me.
oh, and the guy normally runs a mk19. of course a 5.56mm isn't going to seem nearly as effective.
bowfin,
the 6.8 has been abandoned. i have not seen ANYONE, sf included, who was issued 6.8mm ammunition in afghanistan. i have seen 5.56mm lr (i forget the nomenclature) and i've seen a barret as well as some kind of funky looking mk19 variant with a huge optic assembly on it. i've seen designated marksmen and sniper rifles. i've seen m21s and m14s. i've seen a few 1911s including a remington rand that looked brand spanking new. i have never seen 6.8mm ammunition. there are probably more civilians with 6.8mm ar15s than soldiers with m4s or m16s in that caliber.
i suspect that some of the problem is that people expect their enemy to drop like a rock when hit, just like they do in the movies but that doesn't normally happen. not even with .30 caliber weapons. add to that the amazing quantity of rumor floating around the army about weapon related issues and you get what we're looking at. there are alot of soldiers that still think the 5.56mm tumbles on its way to the target, despite the fact that they can see perfectly round holes in the target when they zero. are you going to believe them? or what about the guys who are convinced that the bullet does crazy loops and "bounces" around inside the target? do you believe them? just because a soldier says something doesn't make it true. and that goes double for me.
oh, and the guy normally runs a mk19. of course a 5.56mm isn't going to seem nearly as effective.
chopinbloc,
You are aware that a lot of gear being used by the various military units and personnel isn't "issued."
I personally know a Colonel in the Army Reserve who served in Afghanistan. He carried an AK-47 on his "road trips" or any time he was outside the compound. Pray tell how he did that if no one "issued" him this weapon and the attendant magazines and ammunition??
/*there are alot of soldiers that still think the 5.56mm tumbles on its way to the target, despite the fact that they can see perfectly round holes in the target when they zero. are you going to believe them? or what about the guys who are convinced that the bullet does crazy loops and "bounces" around inside the target? do you believe them? just because a soldier says something doesn't make it true.*/
Do you really believe that it was the above soldiers who dreamed up and designed the 6.8 SPC? Really, truly?? Honest Injun???
Guns & Ammo magazine claims that members of the 5th Special Forces and the Army Marksmanship Unit were the designers of the 6.8 SPC. I wouldn't dismiss their experience and expertise lightly, or confuse them with the above, but that is just me.
However, you may be right about the 6.8 SPC being officially dead as far as the Pentagon is concerned. But this is the same group that kept Springfield Trapdoors on hand until late 1945...
You are aware that a lot of gear being used by the various military units and personnel isn't "issued."
I personally know a Colonel in the Army Reserve who served in Afghanistan. He carried an AK-47 on his "road trips" or any time he was outside the compound. Pray tell how he did that if no one "issued" him this weapon and the attendant magazines and ammunition??
/*there are alot of soldiers that still think the 5.56mm tumbles on its way to the target, despite the fact that they can see perfectly round holes in the target when they zero. are you going to believe them? or what about the guys who are convinced that the bullet does crazy loops and "bounces" around inside the target? do you believe them? just because a soldier says something doesn't make it true.*/
Do you really believe that it was the above soldiers who dreamed up and designed the 6.8 SPC? Really, truly?? Honest Injun???
Guns & Ammo magazine claims that members of the 5th Special Forces and the Army Marksmanship Unit were the designers of the 6.8 SPC. I wouldn't dismiss their experience and expertise lightly, or confuse them with the above, but that is just me.
However, you may be right about the 6.8 SPC being officially dead as far as the Pentagon is concerned. But this is the same group that kept Springfield Trapdoors on hand until late 1945...
one-shot-one
Member
kind of funny
to see much the same arguments in the .223/.308 as the 9mm/.45.
one has more rounds the other has a bigger bullet.
ps. left the cap's off on purpose.
to see much the same arguments in the .223/.308 as the 9mm/.45.
one has more rounds the other has a bigger bullet.
ps. left the cap's off on purpose.
Okay, for those who are satisfied with the 5.56 mm, I will say that I am in no position to say what works for you. I certainly wouldn't want to be shot with an M-4, Garand, M-1 Carbine, or a Brown Bess musket.
I just have a hard time convincing myself that something I wouldn't use on a deer is sufficient to shoot bad guys.
I leave the last word to whomever.
I just have a hard time convincing myself that something I wouldn't use on a deer is sufficient to shoot bad guys.
I leave the last word to whomever.
NineseveN
member
Being in the armed forces does not make one an expert on arms and terminal ballistics. Thank you, that is all.
Of course not, but real life experience counts for a lot.
Personally, I think .308 is overkill for humans, and people aren't much tougher than coyotes, but I will defer to those who have used it for real.
So far, from what I've seen they seem split 50/50 on whether 5.56 is good enough.
Seems that I remember reading of similar failures to stop with multiple hits in "BlackHawk Down" as well as hearing of quite a few incidents in Iraq and Afghanistan.Anecdotal evidence it may be but it seems to be mounting and should not be ignored.
KriegHund
Member
Mad Bodhi, it makes a big difference when the subject recieving the bullet is hopped up on drugs.
(Somali militiamen were payed in drugs, some sort of weed that was chewed, cant remember what its called)
(Somali militiamen were payed in drugs, some sort of weed that was chewed, cant remember what its called)
Last edited:
camelpilot
Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2006
- Messages
- 7
If 5.56 doesn't bring a man down, don't blame the bullet size, blame the clown that can't do headshots.
Send his ass back to the shooting range.
Send his ass back to the shooting range.
Harry Stone
Member
I don't have any problem believing that a larger caliber weapon would be more effective if the goal was one shot instant kills.*
What I don't believe is that our military has known for 40 years that the key to mission success is a bigger rifle caliber and has done nothing about it.
* Of course that would just lead to another debate about whether the weapon that produced those kinds of results should be gas or diesel powered, and if it should have wheels or treads.
What I don't believe is that our military has known for 40 years that the key to mission success is a bigger rifle caliber and has done nothing about it.
* Of course that would just lead to another debate about whether the weapon that produced those kinds of results should be gas or diesel powered, and if it should have wheels or treads.
Crosshair
Member
Aks him what range those shots where at that where defeated by the vests. Sounds like an extended range issue.
And I'm sure if I could get him in a chat room long enough I could get a friend of mine who is over there in the sandbox right now to tell us how wonderful he thinks the 5.56NATO is.
There's as much anecdotal evidence in its favor as against it.
There's as much anecdotal evidence in its favor as against it.
cbsbyte
Member
I believe part of the problem with the current 5.56 ammo is that the military uses a 62 Gr steel core bullet that tends to pass right through people, without incompasting them if it does not hit a vital organ.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Mad Bodhi said:
Yeah, I remember that incident in Blackhawk Down where the M-60 gunner put several dozen rounds of 7.62x51mm into a bad guy and it failed to stop him.
One of these days these guys will realize that moving away from a .45-70 was a horrible mistake...
MatthewVanitas
Member
Bartholomew Roberts said:
The world has become a much wussier place since the demise of the .577 Martini.
Me, I carry a .577 Tranter revolver for CCW, but that's only because they don't make a .578 Tranter.
VICTORIA REGINA
-MV
Crosshair
Member
I say we send them over a bullet puller, a reloading press, and better bullets so they do more than poke holes in the bad guys.
Fire4Effect
Member
In defense of the original interviewee I will say, he saw what he saw. Now please consider that in a firefight what you see, or how you percieve it is affected by stress, fatigue,light, haze etc. As far as the 5.56 NATO goes, I woudn't buy an AR type rifle for personal use, I prefer the larger calibers. But as far as it's effectiveness in combat? It saved my life in a firefight and held off the insurgents to approximately 400 yards. That distance is only an approximation based on the fact that after we were rescued our weapons were examined during the de-brief and all six of our m-16's had the elevation knobs set around the "4" mark, yet I can't recall ever making the adjustments. I say if you train with your weapons till it becomes instinct then almost any weapon or cartridge will be effective when you need them.
Kaylee
Member
I'm not taking sides on the effectiveness or lack thereof of 5.56.
But Deer Hunter, with all due respect it looks like you were seriously fishing for the answers you wanted to hear in that exchange. Heck, you state that right off -- "I'm comprising some information regarding the inability of the 5.56 NATO cartriage in terms of man-stopping power for the last fifty years of service."
Regardless of whether 5.56 is adequate or not for the tasks usually taken on with it, the very way you lead into the discussion colors it to the point of uselessness, at least in dealing with others familiar with the topic.
(Please send him a hearty "Thank You" from those of us back at home though. )
But Deer Hunter, with all due respect it looks like you were seriously fishing for the answers you wanted to hear in that exchange. Heck, you state that right off -- "I'm comprising some information regarding the inability of the 5.56 NATO cartriage in terms of man-stopping power for the last fifty years of service."
Regardless of whether 5.56 is adequate or not for the tasks usually taken on with it, the very way you lead into the discussion colors it to the point of uselessness, at least in dealing with others familiar with the topic.
(Please send him a hearty "Thank You" from those of us back at home though.
)
kaferhaus
Member
Sorry to be so blunt, but this "interview" wouldn't pass muster in an elementary journalism class.
No proof is offered of anything the subject says.
Folks who get shot often don't fall over dead on the spot, in fact it's mostly the opposite. I've been shot, I know. I've shot and killed people that I initially thought I'd missed at the incredible range of 30-40M.
At ranges in excess of 600M the M885 round penetrates better than the 7.62x51.
War isn't like the movies or your favorite cop show.
What makes this GI an armaments expert or ballistics expert?
Most GIs know very little about either subject other than how to operate and maintain the weapon.
Every individual reacts differently when wounded... some guys don't even know they've been hit for several minutes other's (most) know instantly.
On the 6.8... that round is dead as far as the DOD is concerned.... in fact it was never alive.
A couple of NCOs came up with an idea, sold it to somone who could market it and that's as far as it's gotten. NO military unit is using this round, it cannot be supported in the field, has no DOD part #s etc.
Rumors that the Military was even testing this round are BS. Some guys played with it on their own time and then gave very misleading statements to lead others to believe that their actions were somehow given sanction by the Dept of the Army or DOD which is patently false.
Have a few guys taken some personal gear to war? sure, it's happened in every war. 99% of it is optics, slings or other such support gear. Weapons are another matter...
These stories of GIs toting AKs are rarely true, usually it's special ops guys that are trying to blend in from distance...hundreds of meters away. It's not for any aspect of it being a superior weapon.
The reason I rarely post here is because of topics like this....
There's a lot of good information on this board, but as soon as it turns towards the 6.8 or Grendel or what GIs are allegedly toting/using etc. The BS gets a bit too deep for me.
No proof is offered of anything the subject says.
Folks who get shot often don't fall over dead on the spot, in fact it's mostly the opposite. I've been shot, I know. I've shot and killed people that I initially thought I'd missed at the incredible range of 30-40M.
At ranges in excess of 600M the M885 round penetrates better than the 7.62x51.
War isn't like the movies or your favorite cop show.
What makes this GI an armaments expert or ballistics expert?
Most GIs know very little about either subject other than how to operate and maintain the weapon.
Every individual reacts differently when wounded... some guys don't even know they've been hit for several minutes other's (most) know instantly.
On the 6.8... that round is dead as far as the DOD is concerned.... in fact it was never alive.
A couple of NCOs came up with an idea, sold it to somone who could market it and that's as far as it's gotten. NO military unit is using this round, it cannot be supported in the field, has no DOD part #s etc.
Rumors that the Military was even testing this round are BS. Some guys played with it on their own time and then gave very misleading statements to lead others to believe that their actions were somehow given sanction by the Dept of the Army or DOD which is patently false.
Have a few guys taken some personal gear to war? sure, it's happened in every war. 99% of it is optics, slings or other such support gear. Weapons are another matter...
These stories of GIs toting AKs are rarely true, usually it's special ops guys that are trying to blend in from distance...hundreds of meters away. It's not for any aspect of it being a superior weapon.
The reason I rarely post here is because of topics like this....
There's a lot of good information on this board, but as soon as it turns towards the 6.8 or Grendel or what GIs are allegedly toting/using etc. The BS gets a bit too deep for me.
T.R.
Member
I'm a Gulf War Part I veteran. But I was a Civil Engineer in the USAF and never saw actual combat. Fine with me. I saw some dead Iraqi Republican Guard bodies in Kuwait that were a day and half after death. Exit wounds looked ghastly to me. I'm convinced the little 5.56mm bullet has what it takes to do considerable damage to the human body. The Army troops who actually killed these guys seemed to think so too.
I'm not convinced body armor worn for shrapnel protection will stop a 5.56mm bullet.
Jack
I'm not convinced body armor worn for shrapnel protection will stop a 5.56mm bullet.
Jack
- Status
